The August 2018 synchroblog topic invited bloggers to write about something that Christians do not necessarily always agree on. I decided to write about religious freedom laws and same sex marriage.

50+ years ago religious freedom arguments that are being made today to discriminate against LGBT people were being used to justify the discrimination of people of color and interracial relationships.

At that time scripture was misused to support the exclusion and oppression of people of color and interracial couples. Today, once again, people are misusing scripture in a similar way to justify the exclusion and oppression of LGBT people and same sex couples.

Most Christians have never taken the time to study what scripture says about same sex relationships for themselves. Most Christians read scripture with preconceived ideas that have been formed by believing what they have been told by someone else.

If anyone is willing to set their preconceived ideas aside and take the time to study original language while also taking historical context into consideration they will be able to comprehend that there is nothing in scripture that clearly condemns a loving, healthy same sex relationship. NOTHING!

I know!, because as a parent of a gay son I was diligent in my effort to find out FOR SURE what scripture did and didn’t say about same sex relationships. I loved my son enough to go to the trouble. Do you love anyone enough to go to the trouble? If you do, I would be glad to help you.

In fact, there is more evidence in scripture to support slavery than there is to support the condemnation of all same sex relationships.

Scripture also doesn’t put forth the idea that marriage is to be only between one man and one woman or that it has anything to do with people falling in love. Those who claim that scripture dictates that marriage should only be between one man and one woman are making scripture say more than it actually says.

Scripture proves one thing about marriage … that marriage has been changing since the beginning of time. As society progresses, learns and improves, our institutions change.

Traditionally marriage was not between one man and one woman. The idea of marriage as a sexually exclusive, romantic union between one man and one woman is a relatively recent development. In the ancient world, marriage served primarily as a means of preserving power, with kings and other members of the ruling class marrying off their daughters to forge alliances, acquire land, and produce legitimate heirs. The purpose of marriage was primarily the production of heirs. Often times peasants wouldn’t even bother with marriage since they had no property or position to worry about.

The church didn’t even get involved in marriage until the 5th century. It wasn’t declared a sacred sacrament until the 12th century. And it wasn’t until the 16th century that weddings were performed publicly by a priest and with witnesses. A license to be married wasn’t commonplace until the 17th century which was around the time when romance began to have some involvement. As the middle class formed in the 19th century only then did young men begin to select their own spouses and start marrying without the consent of their parents. The idea of women having rights and not being a subordinate to their husband didn’t become common until the 20th century. It was 1965 before the Supreme Court ruled that a wife could be raped by her husband. Until then husbands who forced themselves on their wives were not guilty of rape, since they were legally entitled to sexual access.

The institution of marriage has always been in a constant state of evolution.

“Marriage, like transportation, has always been a part of human existence. But riding a donkey is very different from flying in a jet, and modern marriage has only superficial similarity to what went before. Just as we embrace each new mode of travel that enhances human welfare, no one should mind adapting marriage to the needs of modern people.” – Steve Chapman

Extending matrimony to same-sex couples advances the same interests cited in support of heterosexual marriage. Legalizing same sex marriages encourages stable commitments that offer a framework for procreation and upholds the interest of children in a legally protected family.

The evidence before us is that same sex marriage offers the same benefits to individuals and society that opposite sex marriage does.

And finally, there is nothing in scripture that would support the idea that Christians should not sell their services or products to someone who is, in their eyes, sinning. In fact, that would go against the very tenets of Christianity.

Any use of Christianity to justify discrimination is evidence of a misunderstanding about who Jesus was and what his good news was meant to convey to and about humanity.Discrimination and exclusion were not values of Jesus and are in conflict with the precepts of the Christian faith.

Oh – and one last point – the First Amendment does not guarantee us the right to discriminate based on our religion, it instead guarantees us the right not to be discriminated against based on our religious beliefs. Many Christians who have been led by their Christian faith to become affirming of same sex relationships are finding themselves to be “discriminated against” based on their religious beliefs and that is certainly unconstitutional.

Be sure and check out the other contributions for this month’s synchroblog:

Jesus said he came to offer a message that gave life and not death! In fact, Jesus said he came to give abundant life! BUT anti lgbt theology does not produce abundant life in those who embrace it – instead it produces death – emotional death, mental death, spiritual death, relational death and even physical death.

When your theology consistently produces death it’s time to admit you have something wrong.

Individuals, institutions and organizations that condemn, exclude and/or restrict people based on their sexual orientation, gender identity or who they date and marry are embracing and spreading shame based messages that do irreparable harm to a whole group of people.

Christians should stop saying things that produce death.

In Matthew 7 Jesus said if you aren’t sure about something check out the fruit it is producing, because “every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit”

People were asking Jesus a lot of questions.

They wanted to know what they should believe – who they should follow – who they should emulate and support.

They wanted to know who was right – who knew the true way – what prophets should they trust – what rabbi should they follow?

Instead of answering with a list of shoulds and shouldn’ts, or naming names, Jesus offered a formula that would be useful to truth seekers throughout all of time.

Jesus advised those who were listening:

When you are not sure about a specific doctrine, or a certain theological point, or some Christian message you can simply check out the fruit that it is consistently producing.

If it is producing good fruit then it is of God and true. Embrace and follow the teaching.

If it is producing bad fruit then it is not of God and not true. Abandon the teaching.

Anti lgbt theology does not produce good fruit and it’s long overdue for churches, institutions and organizations to stop embracing the anti lgbt theology that produces death.

There is an abundance of information available proving that lgbt people who wholeheartedly embrace the idea that all same sex relationships are sinful and unholy typically experience depression, hopelessness, despair, self loathing and many times suicidal ideation. Good theology should make people more whole and healthy.

This post is part of the June 2018 Synchroblog which asks the question “Where does ultimate authority and meaning rest for Christians today?” You will find the links to the other June Synchroblog contributions at the end of this post.

Many people are asking the same question:

Where does ultimate authority and meaning rest for Christians today?

Christianity is rapidly changing and those changes may be connected to a cyclical pattern that history has revealed to us.

Bishop Mark Dyer claimed: “to understand what is currently happening to us as twenty-first century Christians in North America is first to understand that about every five hundred years the Church feels compelled to hold a giant rummage sale.”

Bishop Dyer went on to say that historically three things happen when the rummage sale takes place:

A new and more vital form of Christianity emerges.

The organized expression of Christianity becomes less ossified.

Christianity breaks free from that which has encrusted it and the faith spreads.

For some context, we can consider that about 500 years ago Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the church at Wittenberg Castle and the Great Reformation took place. about 500 years before that the Great Schism occurred. And again, about 500 years before the Great Schism a council called in Calcedon determined what was and was not correct doctrine and then, of course, 500 years before that was when the main event took place and Jesus challenged the existing religious institutions to hold their own rummage sale.

At each of these intersections we see the question about authority being asked.

When Jesus comes to Jerusalem and walked into the temple the chief priests and elders came to him and asked him, “By what authority are you doing these things?” The council of Calcedon met to determine “correct doctrine” to serve as religious authority, one of the main causes of the Great Schism were disputes over papal authority, and the Reformation was a widespread theological revolt against the abuses and totalitarian control of the Roman Catholic Church that was seen as the ultimate religious authority at that time.

If Christianity is in the midst of another rummage sale that would explain some of the changes that we are witnessing and why so many followers of Jesus are asking ” where does ultimate authority and meaning rest for Christians today?”

As a Christian I have been trying to answer that question over the last few years and have come to the conclusion that the answer includes elements of scripture, science and community under the guidance of and imbued with the wisdom of the holy spirit.

SCRIPTURE

I spent much of my life in a faith community that embraced scripture as the sole authority but I no longer believe in the idea that the Christian scriptures are the sole infallible rule of faith and practice.

I value scripture and believe it contains much truth and wisdom. I believe it is an important element in the life of a Christian but I think there is a danger in perceiving scripture as the sole source of truth rather than an instrument that guides us to live in a way that allows us to discover truth.

“I know that the Bible is a special kind of book, but I find it as seductive as any other. If I am not careful, I can begin to mistake the words on the page for the realities they describe. I can begin to love the dried ink marks on the page more than I love the encounters that gave rise to them. If I am not careful, I can decide that I am really much happier reading my Bible than I am entering into what God is doing in my own time and place, since shutting the book to go outside will involve the very great risk of taking part in stories that are still taking shape. Neither I nor anyone else knows how these stories will turn out, since at this point they involve more blood than ink. The whole purpose of the Bible, it seems to me, is to convince people to set the written word down in order to become living words in the world for God’s sake. For me, this willing conversion of ink back to blood is the full substance of faith.

This brings me to the best thing about the Bible, which is the way that it will not let you settle down between its pages. Pay attention to what is written there and it will keep pushing you out into the world—to look for the rainbow, scoop up the manna, wrestle the angel, seek the lost sheep, give your shirt to the stranger. Open your imagination to the divine stories it tells and the world stands a better chance of becoming a sacred place, if only because you are out there acting like it is.

Mary and Joseph lead me to pay more attention to my dreams, John the Baptist reminds me that the savior you hope for is almost never the savior you get, Mary Magdalene shows me how many kinds of love there are—and Jesus? There’s not enough time even to begin. Give to everyone who begs of you, pray for those who persecute you, watch out for the log in your own eye, love your neighbor as yourself. Thanks to him, I cannot even pass someone in the frozen food grocery aisle at the grocery store without seeing a divine messenger.

This is not something you learn in New Testament class—or Bible study either—at least not if you are there to discover the right answers to all your questions. But if you want to know more about the God-haunted seekers who came before you and are willing to take your place among them, then by and by you will decide for yourself what kind of authority the Bible has.”

SCIENCE

It seems to me that human beings have a natural desire for a cognitive narrative to make sense of the world around them. Two of the major premises used by humans to account for our observations and experiences are faith and science. They are often viewed as separate entities but I believe they complement each other. I believe that the integration of science and faith can lead to a more holistic understanding of both. If our goal is to discover truth about ourselves, others and the world we live in, then I believe the unification of faith and science will present new and better questions that lead us to answers that will enhance our knowledge, intensify our beliefs and cause us to live and love better.

Carl Sagan said it well:“Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality. When we recognize our place in an immensity of light‐years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual. So are our emotions in the presence of great art or music or literature, or acts of exemplary selfless courage such as those of Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.”

COMMUNITY

I have come to believe that the best way to learn is in community with others where it is safe to ask questions, share doubts, challenge traditions and disagree. Those who are wholeheartedly seeking truth in a community where they can do those things will be able to accept a new idea, admit they changed their mind, adopt what they once opposed while at the same time living out their present beliefs with conviction. They will be able to be confident without feeling the necessity to be certain. They will accept the tension of knowing something while holding on to the idea that they may be wrong. I believe that community plays a big role when it comes to authority in the life of a Christian. Without community to challenge us, inspire us, motivate us we can easily become stagnant and set in our own ways hanging on to narrow views and missing revelations. Community gives us the opportunity to be refined when it rubs up against us and a place to gain humility when we recognize we are only a small part of something much bigger. In community we learn to forgive, we discover our own worth and the worth of others, we learn to love, we learn to handle conflict, we learn to accept help and to be helpful. I believe that community is both the catalyst for spiritual growth and the key to restoring faith.

Jesus said,“the helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything. He will remind you of everything that I have ever told you.”

I believe when elements such as scripture, science and community are imbued with and guided by the Holy Spirit we can trust the spirit to give us the ability to know how to live into the way of Jesus and love in the way of Jesus.

This “spiritual authority” is very different than the kind of certainty that many Christians have embraced in recent years because the Holy Spirit is full of mystery and unpredictability.

The concept of spirit is derived from the Hebrew word ruach. It is something that can be felt and not seen and is often translated as breath or wind. We don’t know which way the wind will blow. Ruach is unpredictable and mysterious.

I believe we are in “The Age of the Spirit” however, I think it is important that we not mistake this time as an excuse for mindless thought and action but instead recognize this is a time for deep introspection. This is not a time to carelessly say “God told me” or “the spirit led me” in order to try and give our own ideas more credibility. Instead, we should remain sensitive to the promptings and guidance of the spirit and as a result be a witness to God’s ways by letting our lives and actions reflect what a spirit filled life looks like.

“The Spirit-filled life is not a special, deluxe edition of Christianity. It is part and parcel of the total plan of God for His people.” A. W. Tozer

However, many are resistant to the idea of the Holy Spirit being the ultimate authority in in the life of Christians. Many believe we need an institution, an educated leader, a book or a creed. I think what scares people the most about the idea of the Holy Spirit being the ultimate authority in the life of Christians is allowing people to depend on themselves.

People might misunderstand what the Holy Spirit is saying to them.

Some may purposely misrepresent the Holy Spirit.

Many are self serving so they may ignore some things the Holy Spirit is revealing to them.

YES! YES! YES!

All of those things will happen … but none the less, I believe that the Holy Spirit is the correct source of authority for Christians today.

Brian McLaren points out:

“Jesus was short on sermons, long on conversations; short on answers, long on questions; short on abstraction and propositions, long on stories and parables; short on telling you what to think, long on challenging you to think for yourself.”

In the end, depending on the Holy Spirit means thinking for ourselves – discerning for ourselves. It’s risky but so are things like unconditional love and grace.

I believe the age of the Spirit has come, will you welcome it?

Phyllis Tickle would be a good source if you want to dive deeper. Here are two of her books I recommend:

Some Christians worry that affirming and supporting LGBTQ people might end up being the wrong thing to do. They wonder how they can be certain they are embracing the good and right position.

As someone who was not always affirming or supportive I can understand their doubts but I no longer have those doubts. I feel confident that affirming and supporting LGBTQ people, their relationships and their identities is the good and right position to hold.

My confidence and assurance is because I keep coming back to this …

The fruit doesn’t lie.

Good theology should produce good fruit and non-affirming/anti-gay/anti trans theology doesn’t pass that test.

Most of the time non-affirming/anti-gay/anti trans theology produces bad fruit in the lives of lgbtq people who try to embrace it wholeheartedly. Fruit such as depression, despair and self loathing are very common results.

We can almost always find a verse or teacher or book to match our beliefs, but … the fruit doesn’t lie.

If a theology is mostly producing bad fruit you know it isn’t the truth and should be abandoned, because … the fruit doesn’t lie.

In Matthew 7 Jesus said if you aren’t sure about something check out the fruit it is producing, because “every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit”

People were asking Jesus a lot of questions.

They wanted to know what they should believe – who they should follow – who they should emulate and support.

They wanted to know who was right – who knew the true way – what prophets should they trust – what rabbi should they follow?

Instead of answering with a list of shoulds and shouldn’ts, or naming names, Jesus offered a formula that would be useful to truth seekers throughout all of time.

Jesus advised those who were listening …

When you are not sure about a specific doctrine, or a certain theological point, or some Christian message you can simply check out the fruit that it is producing.

If it is producing good fruit then it is of God and true. Embrace and follow the teaching.

If it is producing bad fruit then it is not of God and not true. Abandon the teaching.

Scripture does not address most things specifically. Instead it gives us some guiding principles to live by. Then people come along and try to figure out how to apply those guiding principles to real life. When we get it right it mostly leads to whole, healthy, vibrant lives. When we get it wrong it mostly leads to broken, unhealthy, hopeless lives.

If a specific doctrine is mostly producing self loathing, despair, hopelessness, depression, isolation, shame, self harm and other such bad fruit then it’s a no brainer … it’s not good doctrine and we should abandon it.

We can twist scripture to fit with our own perspective.

We can cherry pick and only choose those scriptures that support our view.

We can ignore original language and historical context so that scripture seems to support our argument.

We can almost always find a verse to more or less say what we want it to say.

We can almost always find a Christian leader to teach what we believe.

We can almost always find a book that supports our point of view.

We can almost always find a church that represents our belief.

BUT … the fruit doesn’t lie.

I’m confident that anti-gay/non-affirming/anti-trans theology is wrong because it consistently produces bad fruit and I’m confident that affirming and supporting LGBTQ people, their relationships and identities is good and right because …

When you listen to and get to know LGBTQ Christians who are connecting with faith communities and theology that affirms their relationships and identities you will find they are experiencing a lot of good fruit in their lives. They are typically healthier in every way – relationally, emotionally, spiritually and physically.

The fruit doesn’t lie!

***If you would like to delve deeper into what scripture says and doesn’t say about same sex relationships check out this postwhich addresses the verses most often used to condemn same sex relationships.

I haven’t been able to find anything in scripture that indicates that Christians should not sell their goods or services to people who they think are sinning and that goes for those who are in the business of selling goods and services for weddings.

After reading scripture and considering what Jesus taught it seems to me that refusing to bake/sell/serve a cake at a same sex wedding because you don’t approve of same sex marriages is not something that honors the basic tenets of Christianity.

Jesus’ teachings seem to indicate that a Christian baker in the United States, where same sex marriage is legal, should be extra accommodating, helpful and generous towards a same sex couple planning a wedding.

In fact, if Jesus were here today he might be saying “go the second mile AND bake the second cake”.

*************************

In Matthew 5:41 Jesus said, “If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.”

As usual Jesus was saying something that might have sounded shocking to his audience.

You see, there was a Roman law that could require men to drop what they were doing and carry a Roman soldier’s equipment for him for up to one mile.

The Israelites who lived in Rome were disgusted about having to pay taxes to Caesar and obey Roman laws such as this because they saw Romans as evil and ungodly.

So, when Jesus said “If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.” you would have heard a lot of gasps and grumbling among those in the crowd. In fact, it was probably one of those times when many just got up, left and stopped following Jesus. This was not a message they wanted to hear.

But that didn’t stop Jesus. He went right on challenging them to be extra generous and accommodating to those they saw as evil and ungodly. He went right on challenging them to put their reputation on the line for love and kindness.

Jesus wasn’t worried about people talking bad about someone for associating with the wrong people or for helping a Roman soldier more than was required.

Jesus was willing to risk his own reputation when it came to radical love and inclusion and he was telling his followers they should be doing the same kind of crazy, shocking, upside down sort of things.

”If someone forces you to bake a cake for a gay wedding, bake for them two.

Christians, our Jesus said to not only follow the law, but to rise to a higher standard of love. Christians should be the FIRST people baking cakes — for everyone who asks us. We should be known for our cake baking. People should be saying, “There go those crazy Christians again, baking cakes for everyone. They just won’t quit!” Then, when we share the reason for our wild, all-inclusive love, people will want to hear it. “Let your light shine before others,” said Jesus, “that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven”

If you believe gay marriage is immoral (I don’t, myself) and a gay couple comes into your shop and asks you to bake a cake for their wedding, what should you do? If God causes the sun to rise and the rain to fall on the wedding days of straight and gay couples, then what is our responsibility? If it is against the law to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation, but you believe strongly that their lifestyle is immoral, what should you do?

Jesus said, “Go with them two.” – Jessica Kantrowitz

*************************

My oldest son, who is gay, got married earlier this month. I was so thankful for the love and support we received from so many of our friends and family members. Much of the support and love we received came from affirming Christians that we know and love, but there was a deafening silence coming from some non-affirming family members who refused to express any happiness or joy for my son. That silence hurt us deeply.

There was only one person among all the non-affirming Christians we know personally who broke their silence and offered a sincere, positive wish of happiness for my son in regards to his marriage. It was just a short message they posted online expressing their good wishes and happiness for my son. It was a comment posted on a picture from the wedding I shared on social media but that simple comment meant so much to us. It was shocking to me – in a good way. I was immediately impressed that this person wasn’t worried about what anyone thought about them as they sent best wishes to my newly married son. It reminded me of the way that Jesus loved others and how he was willing to risk his own reputation when it came to loving people. It reminded me that Jesus calls his followers to do the same thing.

It may be rare, but there are Christians who are really invested in and committed to loving like Jesus loved. I’m so thankful for them!

May more of us who claim to be followers of Jesus be willing to shock the world with the same kind of radical love and generosity Jesus demonstrated and taught.

May more of us who profess to be imitating Jesus be willing to risk our reputation the way Jesus did when he hung out with and loved those that the religious people thought were ungodly.

May more of us who call ourselves Christians be willing to go the second mile and bake the second cake.

*************************

Liz Dyer is the founder and owner of Serendpitydodah for Moms, a private Facebook group for open minded Christian moms of LGBTQ+ kids.

The group is set up so that only members can see who is in the group and what is posted there. It was started in June 2014 and presently has more than 2,000 members.

I have a private Facebook group for moms of LGBTQ kids. The group is called Serendipitydodah for Moms and was created in June 2014 for moms of LGBTQ kids. The group has more than 2,000 moms and is a place where a lot of support and information is shared. A simple, but thorough, explanation of the seven scriptures that are often referred to as “The Clobber Verses” is one of the most frequently requested resources. The following is from a booklet written by Janet Edmonds and is one of the best explanations of “The Clobber Verses” I have come across. Janet uses and cites well respected, credible resources to compose a concise, thorough, easy to understand explanation of these verses. One thing I especially like is the short summary that is included near the end as I find it very easy to share with others.

Please note that I am sharing this with Janet’s permission.

An Analysis of the Seven Scriptures Often Referred to as “The Clobber Verses”

Some Christians believe the Bible tells us that homosexuals are sinners. The current trend of increased acceptance of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) community is distressing to these Christians who sincerely want to follow the Bible. They feel it’s wrong to encourage homosexuals in any way because it would mean going against God’s Word. This is one of the main reasons some people have so much trouble accepting homosexuals. They are using the words that appear in the scriptures in the Bible, at face value, to condemn homosexuals. Does the Bible actually condemn caring, consensual homosexual relationships? What was the original intent of these laws, lessons and guidelines written in the Bible so long ago?

This post examines seven scripture passages sometimes quoted that appear to some individuals to take a negative view of homosexuality. The work of several authors will be used who have studied the Greek or Hebrew words that appeared in the original texts. In addition, these authors have taken into consideration the customs, beliefs, religions and cultures of the time the Bible was written, in order to explain the original intent of the authors, as they wrote the laws and stories of the Bible centuries ago.

When the Bible was written, the Hebrew culture basically ignored the concept of a loving, committed, adult, homosexual relationship. One author, James Brownson, has pointed out that the Bible is essentially silent in addressing the contemporary experience of a consensual, same sex relationship. (Brownson, pg. 41) In addition, the Bible doesn’t use any words that explicitly mean “homosexual”, nor does it specifically talk about rules concerning equal same-sex relationships. The question for us to answer is, what was the original intent of the ancient Jewish and early Christian authors who wrote the books of the Bible and how do these texts apply to homosexuals today?

The Bible is a living book and as Christians we can use the teachings of Jesus to help us interpret it. Author Adam Hamilton said that he believes it is acceptable to raise questions and to wrestle with the Bible when something in its teaching seems inconsistent with, among other things, the character of God revealed in Jesus Christ. (Hamilton, pg. 298) According to Jack Rogers, when we read the Bible through the lens of Jesus’ redemptive life and ministry, we can see that both the Old and New Testaments command us to accept those who are different from ourselves. (Rogers, pg. 15) We should remember that Jesus was often challenged to interpret difficult questions concerning laws of the scriptures.

Jesus teaches us that loving each other is far more important than strictly following Jewish laws. He said that the first commandment is to love God and the second commandment is to love others as you love yourself. This booklet will give people who want to follow God’s Word in the Bible an opportunity to see that the Bible does not condemn consensual homosexual relationships. This information allows people to dig deeper than just the face value of the words of these texts in the Bible. Included here will be research, historical facts and insights about the Bible from various authors that may be surprising to some readers. As Christians we know that God is always working on us and that lessons for us can be revealed through reading the Bible. It is often from reading the words of the Bible that we are taught how to be the best we can be, so that we can truly love our neighbor, as we follow Christ.

All of us can admit that through the centuries Christians have made changes in the way we interpret the Bible on some important issues, such as slavery, the role of women and food laws. Jack Rogers asks, “How could most Christians for more than 200 years accept slavery and the subordination of women with not a hint that there was any other view in the Bible?” (Rogers, pg. 17) He explains that in the case of slavery, society accepted a pervasive prejudice and read it back into Scripture, with tragic consequences for those to whom these verses were applied. (Rogers, pg. 18) The text of I Timothy 6:1 requires slaves to “consider their masters worthy of full respect”. (Other similar passages that support slavery are found in Ephesians 6:5-9, Colossians 3:22-24 and 1 Peter 2:18.) In the ancient world, slavery was a given, but in the modern world we recognize that the master-slave relationship is a violation of the gospel and of human rights. Concerning women, I Corinthians 14:34-35 states that “women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.” The author of this passage, Paul, may have originally had a point to make, but today if we took this lesson to heart, where would our churches be? Women are often the backbone of the leadership in our modern churches. The contributions and importance of women pastors and women leaders in our society are impossible to ignore. We have certainly changed our attitudes and left behind this instruction by Paul. In reference to food habits, most Christians have decided not to observe the kosher laws found in the Old Testament pertaining to clean and unclean food. So there are rules and laws written in the Bible that we no longer follow. Our interpretations of the Bible can be changed.

Whether we realize it or not, we are each interpreting Scripture and making decisions as to how strictly to follow the laws in the Bible every day. Can we change the way we interpret scripture passages that appear to condemn homosexuality just as we were able to change our attitudes on slavery, women and food laws, despite the fact that some Bible passages appear to be to the contrary? What were the original authors trying to teach us? Are there other ways to interpret these scriptures rather than assuming we know what these words from so long ago mean for us today? Knowledge of the ancient culture which surrounded the original authors will certainly help us answer this question by shedding light on what these passages meant to their original audience.

Unfortunately, some of the writing here may be disturbing because by necessity it will focus on sexual relations. Many stories and parts of the Bible are disturbing, but we need to take a deeper look at these uncomfortable sections to learn what the Bible authors really meant and how this might allow us to compassionately interpret these scriptures for our lives today.

The Bible quotes are taken from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV).

A brief SUMMARY about each of the seven Scripture passages can be found near the end of this document.

Genesis 19:1-14 and 24-26

The two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2 He said, “Please, my lords, turn aside to your servant’s house and spend the night, and wash your feet; then you can rise early and go on your way.” They said, “No; we will spend the night in the square.” 3 But he urged them strongly; so they turned aside to him and entered his house; and he made them a feast, and baked unleavened bread, and they ate. 4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house; 5 and they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, so that we may know them.” 6 Lot went out of the door to the men, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have not known a man; let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please; only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.” 9 But they replied, “Stand back!” And they said, “This fellow came here as an alien, and he would play the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them.” Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and came near the door to break it down. 10 But the men inside reached out their hands and brought Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. 11 And they struck with blindness the men who were at the door of the house, both small and great, so that they were unable to find the door. 12 Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone you have in the city – bring them out of the place. 13 For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it.” 14 So Lot went out and said to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, “Up, get out of this place; for the LORD is about to destroy the city.”. . . 24 Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the LORD out of heaven; 25 and he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. 26 But Lot’s wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

This story of Sodom and Gomorrah is about hospitality and the social requirement of helping visitors. When reviewed carefully it becomes evident that it is not a story having anything to do with homosexuality. The men in the town decide to do one of the most inhospitable things possible – rape. It would be unlikely for all the men of Sodom to be homosexuals, so why would they want “to know” (the euphemism used in the Bible to mean sexual relations) the two foreigners/angels except to have forced sexual relations with them. In the Near East during ancient times (and today in wars occurring in Africa and the Middle East) soldiers commonly used homosexual rape as a way of humiliating their enemies. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 5, citing Greenberg, pgs. 130, 147) The soldiers wanted to break the spirit of their defeated enemies and “treat them like women” by raping them. The practice was not driven by sexual desire, but by brutality and hatred toward the enemy. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 5) The sin of Sodom is about hard-heartedness, abuse, insult to the traveler, and inhospitality to the needy (Helminiak, pg. 46), not about committed homosexual relationships that exist today.

One of the most disturbing parts of the story occurs when Lot offers his two daughters “who have not known a man,” to the town crowd. The story assumes that Lot is expected by societal norms to keep the visitors safe and that they have priority over his own daughters. Lot’s offer makes graphically clear the value of women, relative to men, in that culture. In this story women are not protected, and women become the means by which men are protected. (deGroot, pg. 22; Dwyer, pg. 8) In addition, if the men of the town were homosexuals, Lot would certainly have known that they would have no sexual interest in his daughters. Adam Hamilton states that he doubted any of the men of Sodom would have considered themselves homosexual by our definition today. Genesis 18 tells us the people of Sodom regularly practiced evil. This attempted gang rape was just the latest in a long line of horrible things the people of Sodom had done. (Hamilton, pg. 268)

Sodom is mentioned elsewhere in the Bible (Isaiah 1:10-17 and 3:9, Jeremiah 23:14 and Zephaniah 2:8-11) but the sins of Sodom, as identified in those texts, are injustice, oppression, partiality, adultery, lies and encouraging evildoers. (Helminiak, pg. 49) Even Jesus makes reference to Sodom in Matthew 10:5-15 as he talks about the rejection of God’s messengers (Helminiak, pg. 49) but he, also, makes reference only to the town’s lack of hospitality. “If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town. Truly I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the Day of Judgment than for that town.” Jesus is teaching his disciples that they will face rejection and predicts judgment against those who won’t listen to God’s word. If the main lesson to be drawn from the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is an anti-homosexual message, wouldn’t Jesus have mentioned that? Since he didn’t, we are drawn to the conclusion that the Genesis passage has nothing to do with committed, homosexual relationships as we know them today.

Judges 19:1-30

This is a story, even more disturbing than the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. The two stories have many parallels. (To save space, only parts of this scripture will be included.) During the story, a man, his slave and his concubine (also referred to as his wife) travel to Gibeah, a Jewish city, where they thought they would be safe. They are finally taken in by an old man. This quotation starts with verse 22:

22 While they were enjoying themselves, the men of the city, a perverse lot, surrounded the house and started pounding on the door. They said to the old man, the master of the house, “Bring out the man who came into your house so that we may have intercourse with him.” 23 And the man of the house went out to them and said to them, “No, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. Since this man is my guest, do not do this vile thing. 24 Here are my virgin daughter and his concubine, let me bring them out now. Ravish them and do whatever you want to them, but against this man do not do such a vile thing.” 25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man seized his concubine and put her out to them.

The story ends with the brutal rape and death of the concubine. The same lessons can be learned from this passage in Judges, as in the story of Sodom in Genesis, that rules and expectations of hospitality are the key theme, while homosexuality has nothing to do with this scripture. Rape, as a form of brutality and power, is another theme of both stories. The near rape of the two men/angels in Genesis 19 (the story of Sodom) and the gang rape of the concubine/wife in Judges 19 assist in shaping an understanding of how society should not act in Old Testament days. (Dwyer, pg. 19) The ancient authors wrote these stories to provide a powerful lesson that hospitality to the outsider was very important for the Hebrew culture. Here in Judges, there are no lessons whatsoever that are related to consensual, homosexual relationships.

Leviticus 18:22

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.

To interpret these passages of Leviticus, it’s important to know that this book of the Bible focuses on ritual purity for the Israelites, and setting guidelines for the Israelites to distinguish themselves from their pagan neighbors, the Egyptians and Canaanites, who lived in the lands before they were settled by the Jews. This is shown in Leviticus Chapters 18 and 20 by three specific scripture passages (Leviticus 18:2-3, 18:24 and 20:23) that state that the Israelites should never do what the Egyptians and Canaanites did. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 10) Biblical historians tell us that the Canaanite religions (which surrounded the Israelites at the time Leviticus was written) often included fertility rites consisting of sexual rituals in their temples. Sex with temple prostitutes, family members, and homosexual sex was performed at the Canaanite temples and thought to bring good luck to help crop and livestock production. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 11).

To Bible readers of today, the word “abomination” conjures up disgust, horror, or evil, but to the ancient Hebrews the word we translate as “abomination” simply meant unclean, taboo, or forbidden. The Old Testament uses the word “abomination” in reference to numerous things that were forbidden for the ancient Israelites, many of which make little or no sense to us today. For example, the Bible declares it an “abomination” to sow a field with two different kinds of seeds, or to weave a cloth from two different kinds of fibers (Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11). It also uses the word “abomination” in Leviticus 11 in reference to a long list of foods that the Israelites were forbidden to eat, including shrimp, crab, pork, rabbit and many kinds of birds. (Helminiak, pg. 58) In discussing the Levitical texts that declare it an “abomination” for a man to “lie with a male as with a woman,” Jack Rogers points out that all these texts were concerned with “ritual purity” and were intended to distinguish Israel from its pagan neighbors. (Rogers, pg. 69; Helminiak, pg. 58) Rogers sets this concern over and against the teachings of Jesus, who is concerned not with ritual purity, but with purity of the heart (Matthew 15:10-20). (Rogers, pgs. 68-69; Brownson, pg. 42).

It is difficult to recapture the meaning of “clean” and “unclean,” “pure” and “impure,” as it was viewed in ancient Israel. (Helminiak, pg. 57) The ancient Hebrew people had very particular ideas about man and woman in relation to purity laws. Men were not allowed to touch women during menstruation (Leviticus 15:19). For a man to have sex with another man was to mix and confuse the standards of maleness and femaleness, and go against the accepted gender roles and disrupt the ideal order of things and thus was unclean, taboo or forbidden. It was against the purity laws and was therefore, by definition, an “abomination.” (Helminiak, pg. 58) The predominant topic of the Book of Leviticus was holiness and Chapters 17-27 are instructions from priests to the people of Israel. (Dwyer, pg. 24) If the Israelites did not follow these rules, they would not be holy and according to their ancient views, a consequence of not being holy would be the loss of the land that was being gifted by God. (Dwyer, pg. 25) Keeping the land given to them by God was an enormous priority and that’s part of the reason that the penalty of death was attached to breaking purity laws as written in Leviticus 20:13.

In addition, the growth in the number of people within the Israelite community was crucial to the survival of Israel. (Dwyer, pg. 30) Hartley argues that this is one of the chief reasons for these rules about sex and sexuality. The survival of the nation of Israel was at stake if it did not reproduce in appropriate numbers. (Dwyer, pg. 30, citing Hartley, pgs. 298-299) The androcentric (male-centered) mentality of the time and the cultural and societal need to increase the population of God’s chosen people led the priestly authors of Leviticus to want to control women’s reproductive capabilities, as well as to protect “the seed,” thereby increasing procreation. (Dwyer, pg. 31, citing Cooper & Scholz, pg. 38) Again, this may have been why the authors decided to attach the death penalty to what could be seen as men wasting their “seed.” For a man to act as a woman, and to act in a manner that did not keep the power-center in the man, would be shameful. This action would bring humiliation not only upon the man but on Jewish society and would interfere with how power was structured and understood. This type of behavior would challenge the patriarchal system that existed in that society and culture. (Dwyer, pg. 29)

An important point to remember is that these verses of Leviticus were saying, “Do not participate in the kind of immoral sex that was done in pagan temples because it is unclean and taboo in our Hebrew society and does not keep us different from the pagan societies that surround us.” Back in ancient times it’s understandable why the Israelite authors of Leviticus would include these rules in their writing, but for today it is evident that they were not referring to a committed, consensual, homosexual relationship.

Romans 1:18-27 18

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made. So they are without excuse; 21 for though they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools; 23 and they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling a mortal human being or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles.

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the degrading of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

Miner and Connoley suggest that in this scripture the author, Paul, is moving through a logical progression. He is talking about heterosexual people who refused to acknowledge and glorify God, began worshipping idols, were more interested in earthly pursuits than spiritual pursuits and gave up their natural, i.e., innate, passion for the opposite sex, in an unbounded search for pleasure. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 14) The behavior Paul was addressing here is explicitly associated with idol worship (probably temple prostitution) and with heterosexual people who, in an unbridled search for pleasure (or because of religious rituals associated with their idolatry) broke away from their natural sexual orientation, participating in promiscuous sex with anyone available. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 14)

Dwyer points out that in the Greco-Roman community to which Paul was writing, sexual relations between males were a given. These sexual relations between men were a part of the cultural life, the religious life, and the political life. (Dwyer, pg. 55, citing Byrne, pg. 65) But these were not the committed homosexual relationships that we see today. In that culture, their only perspective was that “natural intercourse meant the penetration of a subordinate person by a dominant one.” (Dwyer, pg. 55, citing Jewett, pg. 176) The laws at the time in Rome allowed a master to demand sexual services from any slave, male or female. “Intercourse between masters and their male slaves was normal and in accordance with the standards of a male-dominated society.” (Dwyer, pg. 55, citing Jewett, pg. 180) Roman culture was very hierarchal with those in power having free reign to act out sexually as they pleased among those who were of a lower cultural and societal standing. In Romans 1, Paul was speaking to the Gentile Christians and setting forth a counter-cultural stance that differed from the conduct of the surrounding community. (Dwyer, pg. 55) Paul is not talking about mutuality or love in a homosexual relationship. He is talking about the use and misuse of power and authority, and how that impacts one’s relationship with God. (Dwyer, pg. 57) Paul is saying that early Christians must worship God appropriately, not “use” each other in a sexual or other inappropriate way.

Adam Hamilton’s view is that when Paul takes up the issue of same-sex relationships in Romans, he seems to have in mind ritual sexual encounters tied to pagan worship/idolatry and the idea that what was natural or normative was clean and what was not natural was unclean and sinful. It has been thought by many that Paul was describing ritual prostitution practiced in some of the pagan temples. Hamilton goes on to say that if this is what Paul was condemning, then most would agree with his condemnation of these practices. But these practices, and the motivations behind them, are very different from two people of the same sex, sharing their lives as loving companions. (Hamilton, pgs. 270-271)

Some people interpret Romans 1:26 as referring to female-to-female sex, that is, lesbianism. Helminiak supports a very different interpretation. According to Helminiak, verse 26 refers to women and men engaging in sexual practices that were not the ones people normally performed in that culture. (Helminiak, pg. 79) He believes the Greek phrase para physin, translated as “unnatural” in Romans 1, would more accurately be translated as atypical, unusual, peculiar, out of the ordinary, or uncharacteristic. (Helminiak, pg. 80) The passage would therefore mean “simply that both the women and the men gave up the expected way of having sex for something else, whatever it might be.” (Helminiak, pg. 87) So Paul’s mention of “out of the ordinary” female sex might refer to heterosexual sex during menstruation, sex with an uncircumcised man, heterosexual oral or anal sex, or anything else that would not be considered the standard or expected way of having heterosexual sex. If verse 26 actually does refer to lesbianism, the passage is quite puzzling because lesbianism is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible, including the parts of Leviticus (discussed above) that declare sex between males to be an “abomination.” Brownson thinks that sex between females is not mentioned elsewhere because, unlike male-to-male sex, which was linked to pagan cultic practices, there were no assumptions regarding honor and shame surrounding sex between women, as there were if a man did something a woman was supposed to do. (Brownson, pg. 272) The bottom line here is that translation difficulties make the meaning of Romans 1:26 uncertain, and its supposed ban on sex between women is not supported anywhere else in the Bible. For these reasons, the Romans passage should not be relied upon as support for a blanket condemnation of lesbian sex. (Helminiak, pg. 89)

According to Rogers, Paul’s condemnation of immoral sexual behavior cannot be appropriately applied to contemporary gay or lesbian Christians who are not idolaters, who love God and who seek to live in thankful obedience to God. Today we know of gay and lesbian Christians who truly worship and serve the one true God and yet still affirm in positive ways their identity as gay and lesbian people. Paul apparently knew of no homosexual Christians, as we do today. (Rogers, pg. 76, citing Siker, pg. 143) Condemning the LGBTQ community was not Paul’s intent.

I Corinthians 6:9-10

9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers – none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.

In this passage, Paul lists several types of people he regards as sinful, and there are two words in the original Greek text that are relevant here, malakoi (the plural of malakos) and arsenokoitai (the plural of arsenokoites). Many people do not realize that the Bible does not contain a word equivalent to our English word “homosexual.” (Brownson, pg. 273) The concept of homosexuality, in the sense of a sexual orientation or in the context of a caring relationship toward others of the same gender, was unknown in the ancient world. Instead, this I Corinthians list of vices includes words that reflect sexual roles that were part of male behavior in the culture of the first century. (Brownson, pgs. 273-74)

The first word is malakoi, which literally means “soft” and is translated in the NRSV as “male prostitutes.” (Miner & Connoley, pg. 18) In terms of morality, during the first century, malakos referred to attributes such as laziness, degeneracy, decadence or lack of courage. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 17, citing Martin, Arsenokoites and Malakos, pg. 124). In the patriarchal culture at that time, being “soft like a woman” was a common insult. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 17) First century Romans believed that any man who was more interested in pleasure than in duty, was woman-like. So Paul may have been referring to men who were weak or effeminate, such as those unfit for military service. In fact, the King James Version translates the word malakoi as “effeminate.”

Malakoi was also sometimes used to refer to male prostitutes, particularly young boys who were the passive partners in sexual relationships with men. (Dwyer, pg. 63) It was common at that time for married heterosexual men to keep a boy, often one who had been captured and castrated, for sexual pleasure. (Dwyer, pg. 63) So Paul may have been referring specifically to male prostitutes rather than soft men in general (Miner & Connoley, pg. 18), and this would certainly be appropriate on a list of sins. Of course, this sort of abuse would be abhorrent and intolerable to modern Christians, but it does not refer to consensual relationships between same-sex couples.

The second Greek word used here is “arsenokoites,” translated in the NRSV by the ambiguous term “sodomites.” Arsenokoites is a composite of two Greek words, arseno, meaning “male,” and koites, meaning “bed,” with the connotation of sexual intercourse. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 18, Helminiak, pg. 109) But when these two parts of the word are put together, the meaning is unclear. It may refer specifically to a man who has sex with another man, or it may be referring to a man who has sex with anyone, outside of marriage, including possibly a woman. Think, for example, of the English word “understand.” It is composed of two words, “under” and “stand,” but its meaning does not relate either to the act of standing, or to being under something. (Rogers, pg. 70)

One way to learn a word’s definition is to analyze it in other contexts. However, the word arsenokoites is extremely rare, appearing in only one other place in the Bible, I Timothy, which will be discussed below. The Greek word, arsenokoites, is not found anywhere else in Greek literature prior to the first century, when these passages of scripture were written. It appeared in only a few writings after that, most of which were derived from the vice list which appears in I Corinthians, without any context to shed light on its meaning. (Miner & Connoley, pgs. 18-20; Brownson, pg. 42)

There are, however, a few stories in non-Biblical Greek literature that suggest the word arsenokoites refers to instances where one male uses his superior power or position to take sexual advantage of another. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 20) Many scholars therefore conclude that the term refers to forcible male-on-male sex, or to sexual exploitation involving prostitution. (Miner & Connoley, pgs. 20-21; Helminiak, pgs. 109-110; Rogers, pgs. 70-71, citing Martin, Arsenokoites and Malakos, pg. 121) In fact, several scholars emphasize the link between these two terms (malakos and arsenokoites) and the common Greek practice of pederasty, which is the sexual use of younger boys (possibly the word malakos) by older men (possibly the word arsenokoites). (Helminiak, pg. 110) In this context, these words are certainly appropriate on a list of sinful vices.

Another possible meaning derives from the fact that in the Septuagint (the Greek translation from Hebrew of the Old Testament), the two words arseno and koites are used separately in the Leviticus passages, previously discussed, that refer to a man lying with a man. (Dwyer, pg. 63) This raises the possibility that arsenokoites may be a shorthand way, in Greek, of referring to the acts forbidden in Leviticus. (Helminiak, pg. 111) It’s possible that I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:10 (discussed below) may be repeating the prohibition in Leviticus 18:22, which (as we have seen) was specific to Jewish purity laws.

In short, no one is really sure what the words malakos and arsenokoites mean in this I Corinthians passage. The most that can be said, with any certainty, is that the passage appears to condemn sexual abuse and exploitation (Helminiak, pg. 113), a position with which all modern Christians should readily agree. Given this uncertainty, the varying English translations of these obscure Greek words are a very slender reed on which to rely in condemning all homosexuals as sinners. (Helminiak, pg. 107) Ancient abusive sexual practices should not be used to justify the condemnation of consensual, committed, same-sex unions today. (Brownson, pg. 43) The meanings of the words are too vague to justify this kind of sweeping negative generalization about homosexuality based on Paul’s list of sinners. (Rogers, pg. 71, citing Nissinen, pg. 118)

I Timothy 1:8-11

8 Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it legitimately. 9 This means understanding that the law is laid down not for the innocent but for the lawless and disobedient, for the godless and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their father or mother, for murderers, 10 fornicators, sodomites, slave traders, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to the sound teaching 11 that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

These verses from I Timothy are similar to the passage from I Corinthians 6:9-10, discussed above, in that they contain a list of various sinners. Were the authors specifically saying that homosexuals, in an equal relationship, were sinners, too? Again, we must go back to the original Greek words and culture of the time to help us understand if the author’s intent had anything to do with caring homosexual relationships of today.

The relevant Greek words that appear in verse 10 are pornos, arsenokoites and andrapodistes. (Dwyer, pg. 76) Over the centuries, these words have been translated into English in a number of different ways. The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV, quoted above) translates them as “fornicators, sodomites, slave traders.” The King James Version (KJV) uses “whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers.” The New American Standard Bible (Updated) (NASB or NAU) uses “immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers,” while the English Standard Version (ESV) uses “sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers.” The New International Version (NIV) uses “for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders.” These varying translations illustrate the difficulties inherent in grasping the original meaning of this passage.

The first word, pornos, refers to a male having sex outside of marriage, that is, fornication or adultery. (Dwyer, pg. 76)

We have already discussed the second word, arsenokoites, and the difficulties in translating it, in the preceding section on I Corinthians. To review, the only relative certainty is that this word refers to male same-sex relationships that involved some level of exploitation, inequality or abuse. (Brownson, pg. 43, citing Martin, Sex and the Single Savior, pg. 43) It would be wrong to compare this kind of abusive same-sex relationship to a committed, loving, homosexual relationship.

The third Greek term, andrapodistes, is translated as “slave traders.” In the first century, both girls and boys were commonly kidnapped or captured and sold into sexual slavery. (Helminiak, pg. 113; Brownson, pg. 43) This may be why the word occurs next to arsenokoites in the list of sins in I Timothy 1:10, since both involved sexual exploitation. Many scholars believe that the three terms in this list belong together: kidnappers or slave dealers (andrapodistes) acting as pimps for their captured and castrated boys (pornos) to service the men (arsenokoites) who use these unfortunate male prostitutes. (Brownson, pg. 274)

The author of I Timothy was certainly condemning the stock list of vices drawn from the culture at large. Scholars are in agreement that the lists from both I Corinthians and I Timothy were not originally Paul’s. (Helminiak, pg. 112) He used these lists to encourage the early Christians to be good people by reminding them of the evils of the day, including same-sex behavior that involved exploitation, inequality or abuse. (Helminiak, pg. 112) Must all homosexual people be considered sinful just because the sex acts of first-century people known as malakoi and arsenokoitai were regarded as such? It is justified to have a negative view of these abusive ancient sexual practices. But this attitude cannot be carried over to justify the condemnation of consensual, same-sex relationships. It is too much of a leap from this passage of scripture to a blanket condemnation of same-sex relationships that are equal, committed and loving.

A SUMMARY of Each of the Seven Scriptures Often Referred to as “The Clobber Verses”

As we have seen, the seven Scriptures sometimes claimed to be about homosexuality are not at all related to the consensual, committed same sex relationships we see today.

Genesis 19:1-14, 24-26: The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is an example of what happens when God’s people do not live up to God’s expectations. It is teaching a lesson about the importance of hospitality to the stranger. The cruel men of the town were planning to rape the visitors and were definitely not homosexuals.

Judges 19:1-30: This story parallels that of Sodom and Gomorrah and provides an example of how the townspeople plot to rape the visitor. It is yet another example for the ancient Jewish culture of how not to act by showing the extreme inhospitable behavior of the town. Some mistakenly interpret the townsmen’s behavior to be somehow related to homosexuality, but this was an example of the brutality of one group of men toward a group of visitors.

Leviticus 18:22 and … 4. Leviticus 20:13: These texts state that a man should not lie with another man, and that if they do it is an abomination. The rules were meant to set the Israelites apart from the Canaanites and Egyptians who at that time participated in fertility rites in their temples that involved different forms of sex, including homosexual sex. Male-to-male sex was seen to mix the roles of man and woman and such “mixing of kinds” during ancient times was defined as an “abomination,” in the same way that mixing different kinds of seeds in a field was an abomination. This scripture occurs in a section of Leviticus called “The Holiness Code” which has as its main purpose to set out laws to keep Israel different from the surrounding cultures. (Helminiak, pg. 54)

Romans 1:18-27: The behavior Paul was addressing here is explicitly associated with idol worship (probably temple prostitution) and with heterosexual people who searched for pleasure and broke away from their natural sexual orientation or their natural ways of having sex (both male and female) and participated in promiscuous sex with anyone available or used methods not culturally accepted. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 14) In the surrounding culture it was common for men of a higher status to take sexual advantage of male slaves or male prostitutes. Here Paul is instructing his readers to keep pure and honor God. Paul is talking about the use and misuse of power and authority and how that impacts one’s relationship with God. (Dwyer, pg. 58) Paul didn’t have in mind specifically prohibiting consensual same-sex relationships because they were never considered in his cultural context.

I Corinthians 6:9-10: Paul’s list of sinners includes malakoi and arsenokoites. Malakoi means “soft” and is also interpreted as male prostitutes. Arsenokoites is difficult to translate, but it probably refers to a male using his superiority to take sexual advantage of another male. Paul is right to condemn these sexual activities, but this has nothing to do with a consensual homosexual relationship.

I Timothy 1:8-11: This passage is similar to I Corinthians, above. This time it is a list of sins (as opposed to sinners) and includes the words pornos, arsenokoites and andrapodistes. Pornos most likely refers to a male having sex outside of marriage. Arsenokoites can probably be defined as male same-sex relationships that involved some level of exploitation, inequality or abuse. Andrapodistes can be translated as “slave traders.” Scholars believe that the three terms were used together in that slave dealers (andrapodistes) would be acting as pimps for captured boys (pornos) who would be taken advantage of by powerful men (arsenokoites). (Brownson, pg. 274) These are sins that certainly need to be addressed, but this Bible passage does not relate to homosexuals in a committed relationship.

An Example from the Bible of Affirmation of a Sexual Minority:

Acts 8:26-39 – Philip and the Ethiopian Eunuch

26 Then an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Get up and go toward the south to the road that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” (This is a wilderness road.) 27 So he got up and went. Now there was an Ethiopian eunuch, a court official of the Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of her entire treasury. He had come to Jerusalem to worship 28 and was returning home; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah. 29 Then the Spirit said to Philip, “Go over to this chariot and join it.” 30 So Philip ran up to it and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah. He asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 He replied, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to get in and sit beside him. 32 Now the passage of the scripture that he was reading was this: (Isaiah 53:7-8) “Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter, and like a lamb silent before its shearer, so he does not open his mouth. 33 In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth.” 34 The eunuch asked Philip, “About whom, may I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?” 35 Then Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he proclaimed to him the good news about Jesus. 36 As they were going along the road, they came to some water; and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water! What is to prevent me from being baptized?” 38 He commanded the chariot to stop, and both of them, Philip and the eunuch, went down into the water, and Philip baptized him. 39 When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing.

When the New Testament was written, the term “eunuch” meant a man who, for a number of possible reasons, was incapable of or disinterested in having sexual relations with a woman. In Matthew 19:11-12, Jesus described three types of eunuchs:

those who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven,

those who have been made eunuchs by others, and

those who have been eunuchs from birth.

The first category to which Jesus may have been referring would include men (such as Roman Catholic priests) who take a vow of celibacy in order to serve God.

The second category would include those who are incapable of fathering children due to castration or injury. (See for example Deuteronomy 23:1, “one whose testicles are crushed”.)

The third category, those who are born eunuchs, would have been understood in Jesus’ day as including men with stereotypically effeminate characteristics and behavior. Jesus thus acknowledges that some people are sexual minorities from birth. (Rogers, pg. 131)

This does not mean that all eunuchs were gay but such men were commonly associated with homosexual desire. (For a more detailed discussion, see Miner & Connoley, pgs. 39-46).

Eunuchs were often placed in charge of the harem in royal households because they had no sexual interest in the ruler’s wives and concubines. The resulting access to the royal household sometimes enabled such men to move into trusted senior government positions, and this was apparently the case with the Ethiopian eunuch discussed in Acts 8. He is described as the official in charge of Ethiopia’s entire royal treasury.

When Philip encountered the eunuch, the man was seated in his chariot reading Isaiah 53, a passage he may well have connected to his own situation. (Rogers, pg. 132, citing Jennings, pg. 155) As a eunuch, he probably felt humiliated and marginalized from the rest of society to some degree. (Rogers, pg. 132, citing Jennings, pg. 155) He had perhaps even been mistreated by the religious leaders in Jerusalem, where he had gone to worship. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 43) Miner and Connoley suggest that the eunuch may have been familiar with Isaiah 56:3-5, a nearby passage that makes great promises to eunuchs who keep God’s commandments. (Miner & Connoley, pg. 43) Ancient prohibitions in the Old Testament barred eunuchs from entering the Temple or a worshipping congregation (Leviticus 21:16-23; Deuteronomy 23:1). (Rogers, pg. 133) But in Isaiah 56:4-5, the Lord specifically welcomes eunuchs who hold fast God’s covenant. (Rogers, pg. 133) The passage states:

For thus says the Lord: To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give, in my house and within my walls, a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.

The Ethiopian eunuch was a trusted official, but definitely a sexual minority and possibly a homosexual. Yet an angel of the Lord and the Holy Spirit specifically directed the apostle Philip to seek out this man. Philip knew the Ethiopian was a eunuch, but there is no record that he questioned the man about what kind of eunuch he was, the gender of his preferred sexual partners, or whether he had chosen to be celibate. Instead, Philip simply proclaimed the Gospel and the Ethiopian accepted the good news immediately, thereby becoming the first recorded Gentile convert to Christianity. When the Ethiopian asked to be baptized, Philip again saw no barriers and asked no questions. He simply got out of the chariot and baptized the Ethiopian eunuch on the spot.

It is difficult to overstate the significance of this story about the Ethiopian eunuch to our modern quest for Biblical insights into homosexuality. The Holy Spirit could have chosen anyone to be the first Gentile Christian, but the Holy Spirit chose an African, sexual minority who showed faith. (Rogers, pg. 134) The conversion of this man of unconventional sexuality was of such great significance to the early church that it is included in the Books of Acts. The Bible’s unmistakable message here is one of inclusiveness and of God’s love for all people, regardless of their sexual preferences.

Conclusions:

Many Christians want to remain faithful to God’s Word through the Bible. This has caused Christians who read the Bible without background information or cultural context, to have difficulty accepting homosexuals. They see gays and lesbians as sinners who need to change and repent or remain celibate. But when we study the seven scriptures typically used to condemn homosexuals, it’s evident that none of them have anything to do with consensual homosexual relations. At no place does the Bible refer to equal homosexual relationships, simply because such relationships were not recognized by Hebrew society when the Bible was written. Rather, the authors of the Bible directed the seven passages at the ancient Jews or early Christians to teach them to follow purity laws, to worship God and not idols, to be holy and honor God, and not to exploit vulnerable people sexually. These scriptures do not pertain to loving, homosexual relationships today.

When interpreting Scripture, we can use the teachings of Jesus to redirect us so that we can understand how to apply these scriptures to our lives today. Rogers states that we need to read the Bible through the lens of Jesus’ redemptive life and ministry and accept those who are different from ourselves. (Rogers, pg. 135) When the Bible seems to teach us something that causes us to be unfair to the human rights of others is exactly when we need to re-evaluate and use the principles of Jesus to interpret these scriptures. Jesus was radical in many of the ways he interpreted the Hebrew scriptures he had learned as a boy. The New Testament scriptures show that Jesus regularly put the importance of the human individual over the ancient Hebrew scriptures and laws.

Whatever the specific behaviors the Bible is condemning, the seven passages studied here cannot be used to condemn committed same-sex unions today. These ancient texts are speaking against pagan practices, abuse, and violations of what back then were commonly embraced standards of decency and “normality.” As such, these scriptures do not refer to committed, mutual and loving same-sex unions. The Bible is actually silent when it comes to addressing the ethics of committed, consensual same-sex unions. Some may be tempted to think that these seven passages might be construed as referring to homosexuality, but as we dig deeper we see that they were rightly condemning other things: gang-rape, temple prostitution, idolatry and pederasty (sexual relationship between adult male and adolescent boy). (Hamilton, pg. 271) These were the concerns that the Biblical writers were condemning, and rightly so. These practices and the motivations behind them are very different from two same-sex people sharing their lives together in a covenant relationship. (Hamilton, pg. 271)

As a society that obtains much of our moral guidance from the Bible, we need to move beyond these seven scriptures sometimes used to condemn homosexuals. We know that these scriptures were written for the Jewish people long ago, and for the early Christians for purposes very different from those for which some try to use them today. With confidence we can interpret these ancient Bible passages using compassion and love as our guide, as Christ would ask us to do.

The author, Janet Edmonds, is a longtime member of Bethesda United Methodist Church in Bethesda, Maryland. Currently, the official policy of the United Methodist Church does not allow self-avowed practicing homosexuals to be ordained ministers, nor does it allow United Methodist clergy to officiate at same-sex marriage ceremonies or to hold these ceremonies in United Methodist churches. In addition, The United Methodist Book of Discipline currently states that, “The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.” Janet wrote this booklet in September 2016 to help people understand that the Bible doesn’t say that homosexuality is a sin and with the hope of someday changing these United Methodist rules. As Christians, we are asked to seek justice. It is the author’s hope that this booklet will help to bring justice for LGBTQ individuals who have been condemned far too long.

Beth Moore stated the following when speaking to a large gathering of 18 to 25-year-olds in Atlanta during the 2017 Passion Conference last week:

“You will watch a generation of Christians — OF CHRISTIANS — set the Bible aside in an attempt to become more like Jesus. And stunningly it will sound completely plausible. This will be perhaps the cleverest of all the devil’s schemes in your generation. Sacrifice TRUTH for LOVE’s sake. And you will rise or fall based upon whether you will sacrifice one for the other. Will you have the courage to live in the tension of both TRUTH and LOVE?”-Beth Moore

The statement stung me because as the mother of a son who is gay I have often been accused of throwing out scripture in order to support and affirm my son. But, nothing could be further from the truth. As a devoted follower of Jesus and a loving mother I studied, prayed, sought, questioned, listened MORE because I was a Christian mom with a gay son and my experience is that is also true of others like me.

I have a secret Facebook group for moms of LGBT kids (Serendipitydodah for Moms) with more than 1,400 members and everyday I witness the moms in that group asking deep and meaningful questions, sharing profound insight and wisdom, talking about the original language and historical context of scripture. These moms are not people who throw something aside in order to come up with an easy answer for their kids. These moms are not throwing out scripture or setting the bible aside. They don’t want to mislead their kids. They want to know the truth as best they can. They want the best for their kids. They want to feel confident and at peace with the guidance and insight they offer their kids.

So, when someone like Beth Moore says that “a generation of Christians will set the Bible aside in an attempt to become more like Jesus” our ears perk up and we want to respond and share the insight and wisdom that we have gained on this journey of love and faith.

Here are some of the responses from moms who are members of Serendipitydodah:

We follow the Bible, no one is setting aside anything. We are embracing it through the lens of Jesus, not the Lens of religious leaders. We emphasize and embrace what we saw Jesus emphasize and embrace (the best we can). We want to see Jesus be glorified by our love, service to others and the grace we extend to others, not our adherence to rules. – A Mama Bear

Isn’t Jesus the Truth? – so, by becoming more like Jesus you are not actually letting go of the truth. – A Mama Bear

“I struggle to resolve what Beth Moore said, with what the Apostle Paul said, particularly Chapter 13 of First Corinthians on love as one of the only three things (other than faith and hope, which he elsewhere defines) that followers of Christ are to hold primary above mortal speech, human knowledge, and all human understanding. Also, I struggle with Beth Moore’s words when considering the words of Jesus in the definition of the call of Christianity in the Great Commandment, where loving God with all our thought, and emotion, and spirituality, and loving others with the same wholeheartedness, is a refection of how God loves us, and is the axis on which all prophecy and law hinge and find resolution, as in Mark 12 and repeated again in Matthew 22. Therefore, my question to Beth Moore would be, “What truth should we hold above love?” – A Mama Bear

Bill Maher once said, “I don’t know anyone less Jesus-like than most Christians.” And you know what? The Christians he’s referring to read the Scriptures. I think we moms know from our own experience of supporting LGBT folks that the Bible bullies come out because of their faulty reading of the text. They erroneously employ Scripture to shame, condemn, and ‘other-ize’ people who aren’t like them and who don’t behave in ways they deem appropriate. So it’s not so much that we are dropping the Bible to follow Jesus – it’s that we are trying to drop a faulty, abusive hermeneutic to “GO and DO” what He commanded us in order that the Bill Mahers of the world can see a true expression of God in us. – Meredith Webster Indermaur

Sorry Beth Moore–The BIBLE tells me the Spirit will be my personal teacher. The BIBLE tells me to follow Jesus. The BIBLE tells me to love, even my enemy. The BIBLE tells me to be wary of false teachers (men and obviously women, too) who try to deceive the SPIRIT within me. So I think it’s you and your twisted interpretation of scripture the Devil is using because you are the one trying to separate the walk and life of Jesus from your reading of the BIBLE. – Margaret Boelman

My question to Beth Moore would be, do you have the courage to dig deeper and discover TRUTH? …not the truths twisted, added to, reworded & revised in translations, but the truth of God given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit to Hebrew and Greek speaking people. And would you filter those words through Jesus, THE absolute true WORD OF GOD, who was with God, in God, was God from the beginning? Because in light of that TRUTH there is no tension between truth and love. – Betsy Bruce Henning

I would say that Beth Moore does not have the desire, courage, or humility to see how she is harming God’s dearly loved LGBTQ children. Hers is one of the most dangerous and toxic statements a Christian authority can make, because it instills so much fear in followers and that fear causes a superficial reading of scripture and a reliance on so called Bible authorities. After all, who wants to come to the end of their life to have Jesus say “away from me I never knew you?” I grew up in and lived my whole life in an extended family who believed you were going to hell if you weren’t on the narrow path–the very narrow path that most won’t find and is tiny as the “eye of a needle” [which was interpreted literally by my family rather than in its Middle Eastern context]. Most of the church-going “Christians” I know won’t do that deep digging to uncover Biblical truths. It’s a lot of work, and they’re afraid and don’t trust themselves. Salvation is a lot to risk! They’d rather rely on their pastors and teachers like Moore to tell them what to think. After all, life is busy, and that’s what pastors and Bible teachers get paid for! (sarcasm) If you take the Bible “sola scriptura” as someone else mentioned and as I was taught, you have a lot of cognitive dissonance when you read and study scripture. True study is difficult when you try to understand context and compare the original languages to various translations. An individual almost necessarily needs an “authority” to guide them through those passages that create the cognitive dissonance, or at least someone who makes them feel they’ve arrived at the correct conclusion, because after all, salvation is at stake. – Laura Sparks Turner

Last I checked, love and truth should never be in conflict. If they are there is something wrong with your “truth.” And since when was living Christ-like *ever* secondary? – Debbie King

Be careful judging how the Holy Spirit guides those that don’t fit your label. It is not for you to say what their relationship with God should look like. Doing so, does not define truth. – Debby Laird McCrary

I love the Bible..But I don’t like it being used to discriminate against our LGBTQ children. – Lenora Lea Gill

I will live my life to be more like Jesus and less like the Bible because Jesus is the key to my salvation… not the Bible. – Sara O.

We shouldn’t have to sacrifice truth for love because Truth is Love. – Julie Ackerson-Armstrong

Not just me, but my child searched scriptures, opinions, books… many resources before deciding to just live for Jesus. She has contemplated and attempted suicide over her salvation, over wanting truth and love in her young life. She’s only 14… – Glenda Moore

I have searched and studied because I have a gay son. My heart is now at peace because my eyes have been opened to the true meaning of being a Christian. Many many people adapt the Bible to suit their way of doing things, just as I suppose this Beth Moore has. But one thing I do know for sure is my prayers to God were fervent and from the core of my soul and if God chose to ignore these prayers of mine then I can say He does not love me. But I know that His love for me is real so therefore He heard my cry. – A Mama Bear

I am tired of the box of Christianity they think is so neat and tidy. Life isn’t. God loves each and every one of us just as we are. If one believes that we are souls who inhabit many bodies in this earth school to learn lessons, then it would be obvious that we have been different genders. That can explain a lot. I choose not to be labeled anymore and think that we would all be better off not to slap labels and condemnations on anyone. Sadly, those who think they are right and are hell bent on proving it seem to have no trouble putting themselves in the driver’s seat of the Creator if the Universe. If that isn’t arrogant I don’t know what is. – A Mama Bear

I think we are setting aside the Bible, in some instances, because it simply doesn’t make sense. So many holes. So many translations. Once you free yourself from the Bible being the actual word of God, it is liberating to find your own relationship with Him. People like Beth who cling to the literal Bible as infallible take the easy way out because they don’t require any thinking with their faith. True believers can read the Bible, use their brains and come to a place of peace. That’s faith. Holding fast to something that makes no sense isn’t faith. It’s a crutch. – A Mama Bear

I have become a stronger Christian, and a stronger person because of my gay son. I read the BIBLE a lot more, and I pray a lot more. – A Mama Bear

IF anyone lives in the tension between truth and love, it is those of us with LGBTQ kids. We have had to learn to love in the unconditional way Christ taught us, instead of the conditional way our culture (yes, our church culture) instructs us. Putting the Bible aside has never occurred to most of us. Indeed, it is what we continue to lean on as we struggle with how God is using us in the place we find ourselves. He watched is Son suffer and die. Many of us do the same, at the hands of people who call themselves Christians. We know the depths of misery and the heights of Christ’s love in our lives. I would also add that if anything has turned me personally away from the Bible, it is people like Beth Moore.- A Mama Bear

It is a far scarier, humbling way to live… to not have it all wrapped up in a neat little box…. It also takes more faith and a much bigger God. – A Mama Bear

This statement from BM brings visions of the type of judgmental, self-righteous church mentality that keeps me and my husband away. It’s so ignorant, flippant and cold-hearted that it’s the furthest thing from Christlike. BM and those like her can keep their American Jesus. – A Mama Bear

I don’t know what truth is anymore — I have read so much information that I am not even sure about the Bible – I am beginning to think it is just stories written by people that lived a long time ago and PEOPLE have translated it from language to language not even knowing if they are right … And picking and choosing what stories should be included, I am just fed up with the Christian right thinking that their interpretation is the one and only way to read the Bible… Whether it is Satan blocking the way or I am just seeing a way different picture. I believe there is a God, I have good sound morals and I try to see people in a different light…. And treating people Lovingly and equally! Right now I don’t anymore! I definitely don’t need to go be “educated” in a church anymore! So DONE with all this! I just want to LOVE! – A Mama Bear

Being a l o n g time fan, it made my heart sink to read those words from her and even more alarming that my more conservative friends and family have used her words to wedge the divide even deeper between the Church, the LGBTQ community and their allies. For me, that’s not how the Word of God works, not at all. The Truth has set me free from any law and I have never loved more deeply or experienced God or the Word more profoundly. – A Mama Bear

The church’s treatment of the LGBTQ community is reminiscent of days when the developmentally disabled and mentally ill were rejected and mistreated and accused of being possessed by satan. It is heartbreaking to see that kind of hate and rejection aimed at your child. The Bible has been in the control of white hetero men of power since its inception therefore, as with all things in human control, is fallible and corruptible. We would be incredibly naive to think that has not been changed to meet the agenda of these powerful men. I love the bible. I read scripture and glean wisdom when God speaks to me through it. I Worship God not a book. He has given me a heart of love for all mankind, including the LGBTQ community. Unfortunately my husband, our church and his extended family do not agree. I will stand with all those rejected and persecuted for simply being who God created them to be. – Elizabeth Frauenknecht

My God is SO BIG and has such a great imagination. Look at the diversity of ALL that God made! I will certainly NEVER be worthy of such unconditional love. Luckily, I don’t have to be, I just have to accept God and God accepts me JUST THE WAY I AM. God made me to be me. He made you to be you. All God wants is for me to be the most kind, loving person I can be and for you to be the most kind loving person you can be. If we all do that (and I fall short EVERY DAY), we won’t have enough time to judge our sisters and brothers. Can I get an AMEN? – Spring Davidson

I’m not a Beth Moore fan. God is much bigger than the biggest, most popular, most righteous, most justified self proclaimed evangelist. I don’t set aside scripture. I listen to what God is telling me which might just not add up to what my pastor, or my Sunday school teacher, or my small group leader or my dearest friend, or my dearest friend who is a pastor or my bible study teacher interprets. I read scripture, I teach Sunday school, I teach Bible studies, I lead support groups, lead small groups, and women and kids and I listen for the still quiet voice of the Lord to tell me what He has for me. My daughter coming out helped me to become authentic. Authentically Christian. Including a slightly different interpretation of scripture from many around me which does not make me wrong. Pray for God to separate the man made stuff from His stuff. He can’t not. It’s a great journey. He has my in the palm of His hand or I couldn’t do any of this. It’s not about me. Beth is too much about Beth. Sorry. Not a fan. – Deborah Noffert

I pray sincerely that one day Beth Moore will have her spirit humbled and broken by the same loving, gracious God that humbled and broke mine years ago! The church has been wrong in judging and persecuting our LGBTQ children of God. The church has taught partial truths and used verses out of context to justify a position of “judge and jury”, acting as “THE voice of God” on a subject that is in no way “perfectly clear” if studied in depth at all. In the gray space, I had to choose a place of trust in the guidance of the Holy Spirit in my life. It is a faith journey that IS NOT for the faint of heart. I reject the implication that I have set my Bible aside in any way. God has walked me into His beautiful presence and commanded that I accept my LGBTQ brothers and sisters as perfectly His. I am in no way to try to change them. I am simply commanded to love them as they are. I was also commanded to apologize profusely on behalf of “the church” that has judged them for the grave and serious harm they have caused in the lives of LGBTQ people that have sought God with their heart and were pushed away by Christians. – Tamara Darbin

I have been to several Beth Moore events and loved her. It hurt me deeply to see her say this. I have gotten so much closer to God since my daughter came out. I have learned so much actually studying my bible, and not listening to what past church leaders/pastors have said. God loves all people, man created the love the sinner hate the sin mentality! God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit loves all. Remember the greatest commandment is about love. – Renay Boyes

I was shocked at the pain I felt all over again when I watched that statement be tweeted and then retweeted by others I believed to be allies. I have struggled to be sure that the truth of scripture was never distorted in my relationship with my child and can honestly say that we have not sacrificed or abandoned any of the truth of the gospel in loving our son or helping him to become the Christian Man that he has become. – Laurie Harrison Lewis

We can idolize our understanding of the Bible and totally miss the God of the Bible. Mercy not sacrifice was both the God of the Old Testament and the God/Jesus of the New. My favorite recent quote comes from Richard B. Hays: “the quality of mercy is not set in opposition to the Torah; rather, Matthew’s Jesus discerns within Scripture itself the hermeneutical principle – expressed epigrammatically in Hosea 6 : 6 – that all the commandments are to be interpreted in such a way as to engender and promote the practice of mercy among God’s people.” – A Mama Bear

Beth must not have read Matthew 22:40! – A Mama Bear

As a parent of a child that was so depressed they would not leave their room for months or get out of bed, I prayed and agonized with God that He would reveal to me what was wrong. During those agonizing times He would whisper “Transgender” to me. It was a couple of weeks later that my then son broke down and told me he was a girl. Was I totally surprised? No, I was so relieved that God had answered my prayer. During our journey, I asked God to close any doors that we were not to go through while we maneuvered through her transition. I believed and had faith that God would close those doors, if we were not to go through them. I had peace from day one. John 14:27 But during this time, I would sit in my then home church Sunday after Sunday with a spirit that was so “troubled” because they did not embrace our daughter. I would see her friends and their parents sitting in the pews and they never asked about her. I would leave sobbing and so heart broken and grieving. As a sister in the body of Christ should I have suffered alone? Our daughter needed her christian friends beside her, but where were they? Who ended up setting the Bible aside? My guess would be the generation of Christians in the church. – Gloria Melton.

I believe/pray that this will be the first generation that truly sees how horribly we have treated our LGBT brothers and sisters in Christ. I keep asking myself why don’t I know any gay Christians and the response seems to be because we’ve not welcomed them into our churches or society. What are we Christians so afraid of? It’s not a disease that you can catch. These people are just like us made in the image of God. Jesus loves them as much as He loves you and me. Could some of our Holy Scriptures that were translated from Greek and Hebrew be wrong? Yes! Has culture changed since ancient times? Yes! Do you have the courage to open your heart, mind and church to LGBT people? What if Satan is blinding you, as most of our Evangelical churches have sent our LGBT children out on their own in this world confused, depressed and thinking God and His people hate them! This generation hopefully will have the courage to stand up for the LGBT children in their churches and welcome them with open hearts and minds. – A Mama Bear

I read a Letter to Beth Moore in 2015 and through that post I got in touch and joined Serendipitydodah for Moms. In a way it feels like Beth Moore led me to join this group of moms who love and affirm their LGBT kids. I wonder how Beth would feel about that. – A Mama Bear

_________________________________________________________

Serendipitydodah for Moms is a private Facebook group created as an extension of the Serendipitydodah blog. The group is private so only members can see who is in the group and what is posted in the group. The group was started in June 2014 and presently has more than 1,400 members. The space was specifically created for open minded Christian moms who have LGBT kids and want to develop and maintain healthy, loving, authentic relationships with their LGBT kids.

This “Learning & Growing Together” series includes posts I have shared in my private Facebook group for moms of LGBTQ kids. The group, Serendipitydodah for Moms, is a place where moms of LGBTQ kids share a lot of support, information and encouragement … it is a place where moms of LGBTQ kids are learning and growing together with the purpose of developing and maintaining healthy, loving, authentic relationships with their LGBTQ kids. For more information about the group email me at lizdyer55@gmail.com

Christians who believe that same sex relationships are sinful rely on a few verses that have been misunderstood and misused. You will often hear those verses referred to as the “clobber verses”.

In studies of sex in history, Stanford classics professor John J. Winkler warns against “reading contemporary concerns and politics into texts and artifacts removed from their social context.” This, of course, is a basic principle of biblical hermeneutics.

Calvin Theological Seminary Old Testament scholar Marten H. Woudstra says: “there is nothing in the Old Testament that corresponds to homosexuality as we understand it today” and SMU New Testament scholar Victor Paul Furnish says: “There is no ‘text on homosexual orientation in the Bible.”

Robin Scroggs of Union Seminary adds: “Biblical judgments against homosexuality are not relevant to today’s debate. They should no longer be used … not because the Bible is not authoritative, but simply because it does not address the issues involved.”

And yet, many pastors and individual Christians still use some passages to justify their belief that same sex relationships are sinful and unpleasing to God.

The clobber verse that I am confronted with most often is Romans 1:26-27.

There are some great resources available that go into a lot of depth and explanation about Romans 1:26-27 but I am always on the lookout for something brief and meaningful.

Here is something brief and meaningful that can be offered when discussing Romans 1:26-27:

“Romans 1:26 and 27 clearly speaks of same-gender sex by both men and women and is the only passage in the New Testament that does so. Romans 1:18-32 speaks of Gentile (heterosexuals) who could and should have known, served and given thanks to God but would not, so God gave them up and let them do whatever they wanted to do, and that resulted in degrading and shameful acts, including same-gender sex. It is almost a moot point, but Paul is not listing sins for which God will condemn anyone, he is listing sins that occur because people have forsaken Him. These are acts committed by those who have turned away from God and so become “consumed with passion.” All of us recognize that those who forsake God and give themselves over to lustful living–homosexual or heterosexual–stand condemned by the Bible. This passage is talking about people who chose to forsake God.”

That paragraph can open up an opportunity for more discussion. It isn’t meant to shut down the conversation. It doesn’t answer every question. It is meant to lead to more meaningful conversation – conversation that might help someone think about what that verse is really saying – conversation that allows one to introduce their own story into the mix.

In my case, that short paragraph can provide the opportunity for me to point out that my son who is gay did not forsake God and become gay, or forsake God and turn to lustful living, or forsake God and start having same sex relations. My son did not forsake God and he isn’t off living a life of sexual sin. My son, like most people, has simply gone out and dated, fell in love, become engaged and now plans to marry and have a family.

When I include my story and my son’s story it becomes obvious that Romans 1:26-27 is not talking about my son or the kind of relationship that he has with his fiance. It becomes obvious that Romans 1:26-27 is not a good argument against the kind of relationships that most LGBTQ people are looking for and it is not a good argument against same sex marriage.

Forsaking God and lustful living can be discussed further but neither of those things automatically apply to same sex relationships.

Good theology always has some skin and bones involved and once you add skin and bones when discussing Romans 1:26 -27 it becomes obvious that this passage does not provide sufficient evidence to condemn all same sex relationships.

Serendipitydodah for Moms is a private Facebook groupcreated as an extension of the Serendipitydodah blog. The group is set up so only members can see who is in the group and what is posted there. The group was started in June 2014 and presently has more than 1,200 members. The space was specifically created for open minded Christian moms who have LGBTQ kids and want to develop and maintain healthy, loving, authentic relationships with their LGBTQ kids. In addition to providing a space for members to share info and support one another, a special guest is added each month for a few days. The guests include authors, pastors, LGBTQ people, bloggers and public speakers.

When my son came out he told me he had come to the conclusion that the bible did not condemn loving, committed same sex relationships.

I fully expected to be able to prove him wrong.

I was accustomed to “studying” scripture as I taught women’s bible studies for years. I knew what it meant to dig into original language and consider the historical context of the verses I was studying.

I was shocked to find that my son was right … none of the “clobber” verses were speaking about a loving, monogamous, healthy same sex relationship.

In fact, after a lot of studying and searching I had to admit there was no sufficient evidence in scripture that “clearly” condemned or supported same sex relationships.

One would have to put their integrity at stake and make scripture say more than it does in order to claim that scripture clearly condemns or supports same sex relationships.

In light of discovering there was insufficient evidence in scripture to condemn same sex relationships I then had to ask myself, “What should I do?” and “How should I respond to something if scripture doesn’t clearly condemn or support it?”

The only thing I could think is I needed to find out if there was any evidence to indicate same sex relationships hurt people.

I searched and I couldn’t find that kind of evidence either – in fact, the evidence I discovered showed healthy same sex relationships had the same healthy effect on individuals and society as opposite sex relationships have on individuals and society.

Two more things happened which ended up playing a significant role in my journey.

First, I ran across this quote:

“A traditional religious belief is that “grace builds on nature,” in other words religious life depends on a good foundation in human health. Therefore we can legitimately evaluate the validity of a religious belief system by its psychological consequences. Good theology will result in good psychology and vice versa. Accordingly, bad theology will have negative psychological consequences. This is nothing more than an application of the biblical norm: “You will be able to tell them by their fruits” (Matt. 7:16) If Saint Irenaeus proclaimed, the glory of God is humans FULLY ALIVE [emphasis mine], then clearly a belief system that results in the destruction of human health cannot serve the glory of God.” ~Dr. John J. McNeill

And second, I kept bumping into Micah 6:8:

“He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?”

The quote by Dr. McNeill made so much sense to me and supported what I had always believed in my heart … which was the tenets and beliefs of Christianity should mostly lead to a person’s health and wholeness. In other words, our mental, emotional, physical and spiritual health should all be “better” if we are embracing good theology. Like Dr. McNeill explained, good and right theology should mostly lead to good psychology (good fruit).

As I considered this idea I began to understand that when our theology about something is resulting in a lot of bad fruit or bad psychology – such as hopelessness, depression, self hate and self harm – we have an obligation to re-examine what we believe and ask ourselves why we believe it.

And Micah 6:8 became like a guiding light for my journey. The words reminded me that justice (doing what is right) is a very high priority to God and led me to ask, “What would it look like, in light of what I have discovered, to do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with God?”

Everything combined together led me to the conclusion that it would be unjust, and lack mercy and humility, to condemn a loving, monogamous same sex relationship.

There was nothing in scripture to clearly mandate the condemnation of same sex relationships, there was no evidence that same sex relationships caused harm to anyone (in fact, the opposite was true) and the theological position of condemning same sex relationships was not producing good psychology (good fruit).

Those things together have given me peace in my heart about being a Christian who affirms same sex relationships. Those things have led me to believe that condemning same sex relationships is a sin.

The transition didn’t happen overnight. Although I was able to see right away that what I had believed wasn’t right, it actually took somewhere between one and two years of study, prayer, learning, listening and thinking for me to officially change my position/belief.

I’ve been accused of letting my love for my son blind me to the truth, but nothing could be further from the truth. My love for my son made me study more than ever, it caused me to ask tougher questions and to carefully consider all the evidence before me. I love my son too much to mislead him in the wrong direction if I can help it.

I’ve been accused of disregarding scripture and the Christian faith, but nothing could be further from the truth. My high view of scripture, my determination to not make scripture say more than it says, my commitment to study in a thorough manner, my deep devotion to being a follower of Christ and to do my best to live into the kind of radical love that he demonstrated and calls me to imitate … those things have led and guided me to where I am today regarding same sex marriage. I do not affirm same sex relationships in spite of my faith. I affirm same sex relationships because of my faith.

And as I have talked to other Christian mothers of LGBT kids I have witnessed them going through the same sort of process … digging deep, not accepting easy answers, wanting to make sure as much as possible.

As mothers our love doesn’t let us off the hook … instead, it is the reason we must be even more resolute and thorough. Our love is that great.

What seems like eons ago, when I was all proud of myself for my newly accepting attitude of my gay children, my daughter started the conversation about marriage.

The girls hadn’t been dating long so the topic was relatively objective. At that time, my husband and I hadn’t considered it deeply. We were not supportive of gay marriage at that point and felt it was not God’s approved plan. We truly felt we would dishonor the Lord we love by participating.

When our daughter realized we wouldn’t be there – that her daddy would not walk her down the aisle and her mama wouldn’t make her dress, she was devastated.

The pain in our family was palpable.

She knew we wouldn’t approve but she didn’t realize it meant not participating at all.

We had thought it was understood, so we were equally blindsided by her reaction and the reaction of our sons.

Our daughter was crushed and our sons were livid.

Suddenly, our lives went from theoretical to crisis.

We had never considered rejecting our gay children, but now we were threatened with total rejection. Not so much by my daughter but unanimously by the three boys.

In the days of torment, crying out to the Lord, wanting to love Him and my children, He spoke to me. “Who is honored and glorified if your family is destroyed?”

There is a verse I claimed when my husband and I were engaged and it is on our wedding invitations and ny husband’s wedding ring.

Isaiah 55:13 “This will be for the LORD’s renown, for an everlasting sign, that will endure forever.”

That verse has gotten me through some tough times and remembering it triggered my question. “Who is honored and glorified if your family is destroyed?”

And then came the answer: “Only the Enemy.”

I called my daughter and I said “I will make your wedding dress and I will love who you love.”

My husband came to the same point through his own time with the Lord.

This was the pivotal point in stepping from accepting into affirming.

I say to all Christians, our Lord is not honored by the destruction of our families. These are the children God has knowingly and lovingly given us. We should love them in the light with thankfulness for they are beloved by God.

PS My girls are still together and will be married at the end of September in all the pomp and circumstance they could desire!